Udhalimu wa Utumwa Zanzibar na Pemba: Mababu zetu waliteswa, walihasiwa, walibakwa, na kuuawa kinyama

Unaaaacha kumlaumu babu yako tiputipu na yule mwwngne wa tabora...walokuwa wanawakamata wasukuma na walugaga wengne na ndugu zetu wa makabila yote ya tanganyika na kuwauza huko kwa kupewa kete ya bao...unamlaumu middle men muarabu...
 
Hawezi kuwa na photograph...atakuwa tu na hyo ya kuchora...
 
Naomba kujua,mtumwa mwenyeki makovu ya minyororo na majeraha ya vipigo anamudu vipi kufanya kazi?
Hahaaaaa very nice observation....achilia kufanya kazi je kutembea from ujiji kigoma to bagamoyo...huku kwwnye kifundo cha mguu kuna tobo la kidonda lenye mnyororo unaochubua unawezaje kutembea?
 



kanisa ambalo ndio njia kuu ya unyonyaji ya wakoloni ndio huwa linatetewa mara nyingi.

Angalia nini uovu wa kanisa katoliki Duniani


From running on donations to becoming an international holding company, the Catholic Church's financial past is littered with secrets.

So much that author Gerald Posner wrote hundreds of pages chronicling the institution's financial scandals in his new book, God's Bankers.

A little history:

Years ago, the Vatican financed its operations with donations and indulgences, free passes for sins in exchange for money. In the early days, the Vatican made little effort to keep track of finances, which meant the institution was rife with extravagant spending and embezzlement.

After teetering on the edge of bankruptcy several times, the Vatican appointed Bernardino Nogara as its new financial advisor in 1929, who straightened out the church's finances and grew a $92 million investment from Benito Mussolini into almost $1 billion.

World War II also played a huge role in the creation of the Vatican Bank, as well as the unique power it held. As the Allies imposed restrictions on bank accounts, it became harder to move money around. Nogara created the bank, called the Institute for Religious Works, in 1942 to avoid having financial transactions tracked through Western Banks. Because it resided in Vatican City, it was exempt from all wartime restrictions and became "the world's best offshore bank."

The quest to hold onto the money and power that followed resulted in shady deals, cover-ups, and scandals within the Vatican.

Among them, here are some of the craziest schemes revealed in Posner's book.

1. Making money directly off the murder of Jews during the Holocaust

A German officer admitted to having many war-time spies in the Vatican, one of them potentially being Nogara, the acclaimed and able financial advisor. During the war, Nogara began investing in Italian insurance companies which "developed into stakes that profited from the ongoing murder of Europe's Jews," Posner wrote.

These companies made money by keeping all financial assets from life insurance policies of deceased Jewish policyholders, and refusing to pay for those still living. But because the Vatican was not a direct insurer, it was never required to pay restitution after the war.

Many financial records were destroyed during the war, and the Vatican refused access to its own records. Therefore, the full scope of the scheme remains unclear.

Meanwhile, the pope at the time refused to publicly denounce anything the Third Reich was doing, even though the Vatican was one of the most informed institutions on the mass killings, long before the Allies discovered anything.

The Vatican Bank was the perfect place to hide billions in stolen wartime loot. The church also aided and saved many Nazi war criminals after the war.

2. Trying to buy fake securities from a Mafia-linked counterfeit ring

In 1973, the U.S Justice Department began looking into a potential role the Vatican Bank played in a counterfeit and stolen securities operation.

According to an 18-month FBI investigation, New York mobsters were planning to sell counterfeit corporate bonds and stock certificates to the Vatican, a $900 million payment in five installments over several months.

A Vatican cardinal planned to use the faked securities as collateral in order to obtain financing. The counterfeit bonds would be undetectable unless the Vatican Bank lost money on its investments and was unable to pay back the loans, at which point the Vatican could claim ignorance of an outside scam.

When confronted with the accusation in a secret meeting in New York, representatives of the Vatican refused to answer any questions. The then-president of the Vatican Bank, Paul Marcinkus, denied any wrongdoing. The investigation could not come up with enough information to charge Marcinkus or anyone in the Vatican.

3. Using $5 million to cover up monks who were squandering donations
After hearing reports that a group of Pauline monks in Philadelphia were involved in a financial scandal, church officials discovered that the monks in question had spent almost $20 million in charitable donations on a life of luxury.

The monks would raise funds for religious projects, yet would spend the money on cars and personal expenses. Despite their high lifestyle, they also defaulted on $4.3 million worth of church bonds. The vicar-general kept a mistress with church money, and took half the salary of friends appointed to monastery jobs.

Half the monks left the order when the Vatican ordered them to turn over their televisions, stereos, cars and credit cars.

To hide the scandal, the Vatican Bank sent more than $5 million to cover the cost of the monks' defaults and pay back creditors. The hush money also helped to avoid being sued or facing criminal charges.

4. Smugging gold into Poland to overthrow the communist regime
In an effort to fight communism in the 1980s, the Pope authorized the sending of millions in funds to help the Polish resistance, a ten million member organization in Poland called Solidarity.

Marcinkus had an Italian intelligence agent convert $3.5 million in cash into pure gold ingots, then smuggle them into Poland hidden in an SUV. The gold was placed in custom-built double bottoms and on the inside of the SUV doors.

Roberto Calvi, an Italian banker close to the Vatican Bank, said if the church's role ever came to light, it could lead to another world war and the collapse of the Vatican. "If it comes out that you're giving money to Solidarity, there won't be a stone left of St. Peters," Calvi told Marcinkus.

5. Laundering money for the Mafia and other Italian elite
Because of its sovereignty, the Vatican Bank has the ability to withhold account information from regulators and authorities. This secrecy has provided an excellent cover throughout history, as the Vatican moved money here and there to gain illegal profits and power.

"It was not much of a secret that for decades Italy's elite had used the IOR to hide their money," Posner wrote. "One internal review estimated there were approximately 9,300 accounts belonging to 'privileged citizens of Italy,' compared to only 2,500 that met the bank's strict rules. Some accounts were rumored to be proxies for the Spatola and Inzerillo crime families."

In the 1970s, the bank bought a stake in the Italian bank Ambrosiano, which was led by the banker Calvi. For two years, the Vatican Bank moved money around Ambrosiano's accounts, to allow banks and companies to pass financial inspection. Then they'd withdraw the money right after inspection, and keep a cut of the sum.

Ambrosiano later crashed in a massive scandal, and the Vatican paid a $244 million settlement without admitting to any wrongdoing. Calvi faced criminal charges, then died in a murder made to look like a suicide. Rumors swirled around who was responsible for Calvi's death – whispered possibilities including the Mafia and the Vatican.

In 2009, an Italian journalist published a book based on hundreds of internal documents smuggled out of the Vatican Bank that proved fake charity accounts were created and instead used for political donations, laundering, and embezzlement. Even donations to real charity accounts fell into the mix and ended up disappearing.

In 2012, four priests came under investigation for operating bank accounts for the Mafia to launder money.

You can find the full story of money, scandal, and power at the Vatican in Posner's book, God's Bankers.
 




Like West Africa, the slave-trade in East Africa became prominent and was firmly established with the advance and endeavour of the Christian Europe.

Mr. E.A. Alpers writes in African Slave-Trade: Further evidence that the slave trade was by no means prominent in East Africa before the eighteenth century comes from the Portuguese. Surely the Portuguese, as the pioneers of the Atlantic slave-trade, would have tried to exploit the slave-trade in East Africa had they found it to be already flourishing. But the early Portuguese chroniclers only mention the slave-trade in passing. Much more important were the gold and ivory traders to Arabia and India. It is to these products that the Portuguese invaders turned their attention throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, not only along the coast of Kenya and Tanzania, but also Mozambique and Zimbabwe. Even wax and ambergris seem to have been more important than slaves during most of this period.

For unlike the colonialist in the Americas, the Portuguese never developed any sort of plantation economy in India. The Portuguese slave-trade from Mozambique to India rarely reached as many as one thousand individuals in any one year, and was usually less than half that number. That to Brazil was illegal until 1645 and was never seriously pursued until the beginning of the nineteenth century. As late as 1753, when the foundations of the new slave-trade in East Africa were being laid, there was grand total of only 4,399 African slaves in the whole of Portuguese India. [page 123 in original publication missing]

What were these foundations? Despite the long Arab contact with East Africa, and their could to encourage the slave-trade with the French. According to official figures, more than 1,000 slaves were being exported each year. French, smuggling to avoid the taxes which were levied at Mozambique, probably raised the annual figure to at least 1,500. A similar figure was probably taken away from Ibo during this decade. Henceforth the Portuguese at Mozambique and Ibo (and later at Quelimane, near the mouth of the Zambezi River) were committed to a policy of slaving from which there was no turning back until abolition.

The trade became much brisker in the eighties, especially after the conclusion of the American war of independence. During the seventies a few adventurous French slavers had taken cargoes from Mozambique to the West Indies, because they were finding it increasingly unprofitable to seek their chattels along the Guinea coast. Now, in peacetime, with greater competition for slaves in West Africa, the way was opened for a massive expansion of the American slave trade from East Africa.

At the same time Portuguese vessels also began to take an active, though still secondary, part in the trade to the Mascarene Island. Official figures from Mozambique alone show that from 1781 through 1794 a total of 46,461 slaves were embarked on Portuguese and foreign ships, nearly all of which were French. Allowing for a minimum amount of smuggling, at least 4,000 slaves annually must have been leaving the Mozambique area during this period.

It was this juncture that Arabs extended a helping hand to these Christian Slave-traders. The same author says, After the Omani Arabs had responded to the call of some of the Swahili rulers of the coastal towns and with their help had in 1698 evicted the Portuguese from Mombassa and other outposts, they were themselves too weak to do more than disturb and rob the very people who had sought their aid. But after the Busaid family overthrew the Yorubi and established their rule in Oman in about 1744, they were able to begin effective economic exploitation of the people of East Africa. Like all previous merchants on the coast they were primarily interested in ivory, but from this point we can also detect a steady increase in the slave-trade.

There are not, however, any accurate statistics on the volume of the Arab slave trade in the eighteenth century. The first indication which exists come from a French slaver named Jean-Vincent Morice, who traded at both Zanzibar and Kilwa, which was the most important slave port on the coast, in the 1770's. On the 14th September, 1776, Morice made a treaty with Sultan of Kilwa for the annual purchase of at the least 1,000 slaves. In three trips to Zanzibar and Kilwa before signing this treaty, he had bought 2,325 slaves for export. Morice does not tell us how many slaves the Arabs were taking away from the coast each year, but he clearly considered it to be a big business by French standards.

It seems reasonable to suggest that at least 2,000 slaves a year were involved in the Arab trade at this time. So although the French did not dominate the slave-trade here as they did at Mozambique, they acted as an important stimulus to the demand of slaves at a period when the Arab trade was still out-growing its infancy. French efforts continued through the 1780's, but by the end of the century these probably had become much less important than the Arab trade.

Several new factors gave rise to the increased demand for slaves from East Africa during the nineteenth century. In the Portuguese coastal sphere of influence there was a sharp upswing in the slave-trade to Brazil. This was caused by the removal of the Portuguese royal family from Lisbon to Brazil during the Napoleonic Wars. Special concessions were granted to the Brazilians and soon a flourishing trade in slaves was being carried on around the Cape of Good Hope at Mozambique.

It is now an accepted fact among serious historians of East Africa that long distance trade routes between the interior and the coast were established exclusively through African initiative. In other words trade routes were forged by Africans from the interior going to the coast, not by the Arabs, or the Swahili, setting off from the coast into the unknown, hostile interior. Swahili traders only began to forsake the security of the coast in the second half of the eighteenth century, and travelled along well-established routes which had been developed decades before. Only after the nineteenth century was underway did Arab traders dare follow this lead.'

The Yao who were to become the most dedicated African slave-traders in East Africa, thus had a long tradition of carrying ivory and other legitimate goods to the coast decades before the combined French and Arab demand for slaves began to come into play.

In West Africa these routes were driven inland from the coast by Africans who were primarily seeking slaves. Slaves dominated the West African trade from the first. In East Africa neither of these conditions was matched. The slave-trade must be seen in the context of earlier, well-established, and profitable long distance trade which was based overwhelmingly on ivory. This is particularly important to remember for the southern region which was always the main reservoir for the East African slave-trade.

Mr. Alpers concludes, It should be clear by now that the old stereotyped idea that most slaves were seized by marauding bands of Arabs and Swahili traders is just another one of the myths which have grown up around the East African slave-trade. But we must not make a mistake by underestimating the role which these individuals played in this business.

Once again, I should emphasise that my aim is not to ridicule the efforts of a handful of moralists who were engaged in the propaganda against slavery. What I want to show is that their efforts did not (and could not) succeed until the economic pressure forced Britain first to restrict slave-trade and then abolish slavery.

Of course, when Britain set out to abolish slavery it could not proclaim from the roof-tops that it was abolishing it to compete against French industrialists. It had to turn it into a moral and ethical issue before it could hope to pressure other governments to follow suit. And so it did. We know how Britain waged wars not to protect its economic and political empire, but to protect the Freedom of People. The same was the case with its war against slavery. Morality and ethics was an issue for a handful of impotent moralists only. The real issue, so far as the governments and the settlers and colonialists were concerned, was economy.
 





Churches Participate in Slave-Trade



What was the attitude of the Christian church towards the Negro slave trade? From its inception, Christianity kept its eyes closed to the plight of the slaves. As mentioned earlier, the only reference to the slavery is found in the epistle of St. Paul returning a slave to Philemon to his master. That is all. Ameer Ali rightly comments that Christianity found slavery a recognised institution of the empire; it adopted the system without any endeavour to mitigate its baneful character, or promote its gradual abolition, or to improve the status of slaves.

To recognise the part played by the Christian churches in the slave trade one should read again the words of Mr. Alpers who writes, inter alia, that the Christians were aware that to sell their fellow human beings could not be morally justified. Yet the Christian church came forward with excuses for the slave-trade. Many priests themselves carried on slave-trading, especially in Angola, and many others owned slaves in the Americas.

The only reason the Catholic Church give for its action was that it was trying to save African souls by baptising the slaves. The Protestants were worse, for they did not even make it clear that they accepted that the Africans had a soul. Instead, they supported the view that the African slave was a piece of property like furniture or a domestic animal. There is no part of the history of Christian church which was more disgraceful than its support of the Atlantic slave-trade.2

The arguments of James Boswell have already been quoted where he emphasises that slavery was an institution sanctioned in all ages by God and that to abolish slavery would be to shut the gate of mercy on mankind!

Now I quote from Capitalism and Slavery of Dr. Eric Williams, who was a recognised historian and was also the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago. He writes, The Church also supported the slave trade. The Spaniards saw in it an opportunity of converting the heathen, and the Jesuits, Dominicans and Franciscans were heavily involved in sugar cultivation which meant slave-holding.

The story is told of an elder of the Church in Newport who would invariably, the Sunday following the arrival of slaves from the coast, thank God that 'another cargo of benighted beings had been brought to land where they could have the benefit of a gospel dispensation.' But in general the British planters opposed Christianity for their slaves. It made them more perverse and intractable and therefore less valuable. It meant also instruction in the English language, which allowed diverse tribes to get together and plot sedition.

The governor of Barbados in 1695 attributed it to the planters' refusal to give the slave Sundays and feast days off, and as late as 1832 British public opinion was shocked by the planters' rejection of a proposal to give the Negroes one day in the week in order to permit the abolition of the Negro Sunday market. The Church obediently toed the line.

The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel prohibited Christian instruction to its slaves in Barbados, and branded 'Society' on its new slaves to distinguish them from those of the laity; the original slaves were the legacy of the Christopher Codrington. Sherlock, later Bishop of London, assured the planters that 'Christianity and the embracing of the Gospel does not make the least difference in civil property.' Neither did it impose any barriers to clerical activity.

For his labours with regards to the Asiento which he helped to draw up as a British plenipotentiary at Utrecht, Bishop Robinson of Bristol was promoted to see of London. The bell of the Bristol churches pealed merrily on the news of the rejection of Parliament of Wilberforce's bill for the abolition of the slave-trade. The slave trader, John Newton, gave thanks to the Liverpool churches for the success of this last venture before his conversion and implored God's blessing on his. He established public worship twice every day on his slaver, officiating himself, and kept a day of fasting and praying, not for the slaves but for crew. 'I never knew', he confessed, 'sweeter or more frequent hours of divine communion than in the last two voyages to Guinea.'

The famous Cardinal Manning of the nineteenth century was the son of a rich West Indian merchant dealing in slave-grown produce. Many missionaries found it profitable to drive out Beelzebub by Beelzebub. According to the most recent English writer on the slave trade, they 'considered that the best way in which to remedy abuse of Negro slaves was to set the plantation owner a good example by keeping slaves and estates themselves, accomplishing in this practical manner the salvation of the planters and the advancement of their foundations'. The Moravian missionaries on the island held slaves without hesitation; the Baptists, one historian writes with charming delicacy, would not allow their earlier missionaries to deprecate ownership of slaves. To the very end the Bishop of Exeter retained his 655 slaves, for whom he received over 12,700 pounds compensation in 1833.

Church historians make awkward apologies that conscience awoke very slowly to the appreciation of the wrongs inflicted by slavery and that the defence of slavery by churchmen 'simply arose from want of delicacy of moral perception'. There is no need to make such apologies. The attitude of the churchmen was the attitude of the layman. The eighteenth century, like any other century, could not rise above its economic limitations. As Whitefield argued in advocating the repeal of that article of the Georgia charter which forbade slavery, 'It is plain to demonstration that hot countries cannot be cultivated without Negroes.'.

Quaker nonconformity did not extend to the slave trade. In 1756 there were eighty-four Quakers listed as members of the Company trading to Africa, among them the Barclay and the Baring families. Slave dealing was one of the most lucrative investments of English as of American Quakers, and the name of slaver, The Willing Quaker, reported from Boston at Sierra Leone in 1793, symbolizes the approval with which the slave trade was regarded in Quaker circles. The Quaker opposition to the slave trade came first and largely not from England but from America, and there from the small rural communities of the North, independent of slave labour. 'It is difficult', writes Dr. Gray, 'to avoid the assumption that opposition to the slave system was at the first confined to a group who gained no direct advantage from it, and consequently possessed an objective attitude.'...

Slavery existed under the very eyes of eighteenth century Englishmen. And English coin, the guinea, rare though it was and is, had its origin in the trade of Africa. A Westminster goldsmith made silver padlocks for blacks and dogs. Busts of blackamoors and elephants, emblematical of the slave trade adorned the Liverpool Town Hall. The insignia and equipment of the slave traders were boldly exhibited for sale in the shops and advertised in the press.

Slaves were sold openly at auction. Slaves being invaluable property, with title recognised by law, the postmaster was the agent employed on occasions to recapture runaway slaves and advertisements were published in the official organ of the government. Negro servants were common. Little black boys were the appendages of slave captains, fashionable ladies or women of the easy virtue. Hogarth's heroine, 'The Harlots Progress' is attended by a Negro boy, and Marguerito Steen's Orabella Burmester typifies eighteenth century English opinion in her desire for little black boy whom she could love as her long-haired kitten. Freed Negroes were conspicuous among London beggars and were known as St. Giles blackbirds. So numerous were they that a parliamentary committee was set up in 1786 for relieving the black poor.

'Slaves cannot breathe in England,' wrote the poet Cowper. This was licence of the poet. It was held in 1677 that 'Negroes being usually bought and sold among merchants, so merchandise, and also being infidels, there might be a property in them'. In 1729 the Attorney General ruled that baptism did not bestow freedom or make any alteration in the temporal condition of slave; in addition the slave did not become free by being brought to England, and once in England the owner could legally compel his return to the plantations. So eminent an authority as Sir William Blackstone held that 'with respect to any right the master may have lawfully acquired to the perpetual service of John or Thomas, will remain exactly in the same state of subjection for the life,' in England or elsewhere.3

When ships loaded with human cargo sailed from Christian countries to Western hemisphere, Christian priests used to bless the ship in the name of Almighty and admonish the slaves to be obedient. It never entered into their minds to admonish the masters to be kind to the slaves.

It is hard to believe but it seems that the Roman Catholics think it quite in keeping with the teachings of their church to obtain slaves even in this era of 1970s. In August 1970 the world was shocked to hear that the Roman Catholics had purchased, at the price ranging from 250 pounds to 300 pounds each, about 1500 Indian girls to shut them into convents because European girls do not like to live as nuns.4 There was so much outcry in the world press that the Vatican had to establish a commission to enquire into this affair. But even before the commission started its enquire, a Vatican spokesman had to admit that there was an element of truth in the reports, though he dutifully condemned the Sunday Times for its sensation-mongering.


  • 2. Alpers, op. cit., p. 22.
  • 3. Williams, op. cit., pp. 42-5.
  • 4. Sunday Times (London) as quoted in East African Standard (Nairobi), August 25, 1970.
 



Some historians argue that if churches had used their power, the Atlantic slave trade might have never occurred. By the same logic, others argue that the Catholic church and Catholic missionaries could have also helped to prevent the colonization and brutality of colonialism in Africa. However, history shows that the Catholic church did not oppose the institution of slavery until the practice had already become infamous in most parts of the world. In most cases, the churches and church leaders did not condemn slavery until the 17th century. The five major countries that dominated slavery and the slave trade in the New World were either Catholic, or still retained strong Catholic influences including: Spain, Portugal, France, and England, and the Netherlands.

Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature, is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can be several just titles of slavery, and these are referred to by approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons … It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or given”.- Pope Pius IX


HISTORY


The actions of the Catholic church towards slavery proved to be insincere. History shows that the first extensive shipment of black Africans that would later become known as the Transatlantic slave trade, was initiated at the request of Bishop Las Casas and authorized by Charles V in 1517. Ironically, Catholic missionaries such as the Jesuits, who also owned slaves, worked to alleviate the suffering of Native American slaves in the New World. While showing mercy to Native Americans, the church placed some books critical of slavery on the Index of Forbidden Books by the Holy Office between 1573-1826. Capuchin missionaries were excommunicated for calling for the emancipation of black slaves in the Americas .

At various points the Catholic church would appease its followers and their conscience by trying to find a middle ground. Because Catholics considered baptized slaves in full communion with the Church, as opposed to some non-Catholic colonies, masters could not kill a slave without facing murder charges. If able, slaves had a right to purchase their freedom, referred to as an act of manumission. Slaves could not be worked on Sundays or on the thirty Catholic feast days, guaranteeing some days of leisure. Slaves could also join lay Catholic fraternal organizations alongside free blacks. All of these protections, perhaps, provided slaves in Catholic territories with a degree of protection from the harshness of the dehumanizing experience of slavery. Amazingly, Catholic Bishops would publicly condemn slavery but privately allowed it to continue in colonies that economically enriched the church.

Finally, in 1965 the Second Vatican Council declared that forced slavery was an infamy that dishonored the Creator and was a poison in society.
 


CATHOLIC CHURCH TIMELINE OF CRITICAL POINTS IN HISTORY



YEAR CHURCH’S POSITION


362 AD The local Council at Gangra in Asia Minor excommunicates anyone encouraging a slave to despise his master or withdraw from his service. (Became part of Church Law from the 13th to 20th centuries).

354- 430 AD St. Augustine teaches that the institution of slavery derives from God and is beneficial to slaves and masters.

650 AD Pope Martin I condemns people who teach slaves about freedom or who encourage them to escape.

1179 AD The Third Lateran Council imposes slavery on those helping the Saracens.

1226 AD The legitimacy of slavery is incorporated in the Corpus Iuris Canonici, promulgated by Pope Gregory IX which remained official law of the Church until 1913. Canon lawyers worked out four “just titles” for holding slaves: slaves captured in war, persons condemned to slavery for a crime; persons selling themselves into slavery, including a father selling his child; children of a mother who is a slave.

1224- 1274 AD St.Thomas Aquinas defends slavery as instituted by God in punishment for sin, and justified as being part of the ‘right of nations’ and natural law. Children of a slave mother are rightly slaves even though they have not committed personal sin!


1452 AD Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas on 18 June, 1452. It authorizes (King) Alfonso V of Portugal to reduce any “Saracens (Muslims) and pagans and any other unbelievers to perpetual slavery.


The same pope wrote the bull Romanus Pontifex on January 5, 1455 to the same Alfonso. As a follow-up to the Dum diversas, it extended to the Catholic nations of Europe dominion over discovered lands during the Age of Discovery. Along with sanctifying the seizure of non-Christian lands, it encouraged the enslavement of native, non-Christian peoples in Africa and the New World.


1493 AD Pope Alexander VI authorizes the King of Spain to enslave non-Christians of the Americas who are at war with Christian powers.

1494 AD Pope Alexander VI, in the 1494 Treaty of Tordesillas, divides the known New World between the two countries. As there was a need to locate a group to work in areas where the supply of indigenous labor was insufficient, to sustain their colonies, Spain and Portugal imported Africans.

1500- 1850 AD Twelve million Africans arrived in the Americas to toil as slaves. The vast majority of these slaves worked in the Catholic colonies of Spain and Portugal

1548 AD Pope Paul III confirms the right of clergy and laity to own slaves

1866 AD Pope Pius IX declares:

Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature, is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can be several just titles of slavery, and these are referred to by approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons … It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or given”.
 
Wazungu ndo wametutesa watu weusi ndo maana kila sehemu yao ya kidini ya kale kama kanisa lazima utakuta nyororo au shimo mahala walipokuwa wanauza watumwa.
 
Cc Pasco FaizaFoxy Bill Cosby Mahmood
 


Fact from So holly BIBLE [emoji115]
Unfortunately hukumalizia mpaka mstari wa 20. Ili kuelewa maudhui yame ni yapi.
Na probably umetumia king James version manake hii ndio neno mtumishi ina substitute kua slave. Kwasababu ya akili ya mfalme. I guess.

Ni vyema upate mateso kwa kutenda wema kuliko.dhambi.
 
Unfortunately katika dini isiyovumilia criticisms zA aina yoyote ile duniani ni hiyo ya kwako. Hadi waumini wanaitana watukufu, kitabu kitukufu nk.
Wanapenda kusalimiwa na kuvaa mavazi meupe kufuga sharubu ndefu ili kuonyesha ukuu wao.. Yesu alituonya kuhusu hawa watu two thousands years ago.
Nikiweka hapa ideas za utumwa naamini mods watafunga haka ka thread mapema. Ili ukweli usikufikieni.

We endelea kukaa kwenye box. Ujidanganye, uone umeshinda lakini dhamiri yako inakuunguza.na kukuchoma, Ndani kwa Ndani. Inakutaka ujiulize. Na wewe hutaki kuisikiliza.
Itakuhukumu siku moja.itakua ushahidi wako siku moja..
Unaweza mdanganya kila mtu duniani lakini sio Mungu aliye hai katika Yesu Kristo Bwana wetu.
 


Pasco

Waarabu na biashara ya utumwa
Wazungu ndio wagunduzi wa Camera..ni nadra kupata picha zA waarabu kwasababu hawakua na technolohja yoyote ya kisayansi. Waarabu ni wala date tu. Na kujifunika vumbi isiingie kwenye PUA zao.
 
Umeshindwa kupinga hata kimoja kihusu UJAMBAZI na Uuwaji unaofanywa na KANISA badala yake unatukana mavazi ya waislamu.

Huu ndio Ugalatia haswaa. Manake ni Pumba.com

Hizo hoja alizoweka Gavana hazina wa kuzikataa. Na kwa elimu yako ya kanisa ilivyo dhaifu unadhani kuwakashifu WASIO WAKRISTO kutaficha Uchafu wa Kanisa.

Pole sana mlokole. Wajinga ndio wali wenu huo.
 


Wewe unauvumilia hata utumwa huu wa kuripuliwa makalio ??? Hakuna hata tu mmoja aliyelishitaki kanisa kwa kuwaharibu watoto hapo Soni, Tanzania

labda mumeupenda mchezo wa utumwa huu mpya wa mudhungu!!!!!


Gonga hapo chini

Former 1950s students to sue Catholic order over abuse - BBC News
 
Nimecheka sana watu wanavyosema sultan hajawahi kuwatesa wazanzibari...

It seems ukiwasema waarabu... mada inabadilishwa kuonyesha unaisema dini fulani...

Hapa itakuwa vita tu ya udini maana waafrika akili zetu ndivyo zilivyo...
Tatizo kubwa lililopo kwa waafrika sasa ni utumwa kwenye akili zetu na hasa kupitia hizi dini za hawa conqueres wetu au slave masters hasa waarabu na wazungu ila kiukweli kabisa wazungu wanajulikana kwa ukatili wao dhid ya mtu mweusi lakini once ukimgusa mwarabu ambaye ni katili mara mia ya mzungu basi wafia dini au watumwa wa hiyo dini huja juu na hata kutaka kubadilisha uhasilia wa historia ilivyo,kwahiyo usishange mkuu kuona watu kama kina naniiiii humu wakitokwa na povu kumtetea katili mwarabu,ujue damage iliyofanyika kwa mtu mweusi ni kubwa mno hivyo basi utumwa wa akili hautaisha milele
 
Wewe pia ni mmoja wa wahanga wa utumwa.
Unalalama halafu ukienda chooni unachambi makaratasi
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…